New European cup. (Or whatever it's called) Qualification agreed? Part 2

First topic message reminder :

A continuation of the previous thread. For everyone with more to say.

He's Irish too!   

Or at least a lot more Irish than he is Welsh.

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Munchkin wrote:

Where in the link does it prove that Italy, Scotland, and Wales are propping up the 6 Nations, and HEC?, and how this somehow translates into Irish success?
The regions have been a disaster in Rabo, and HEC..

Well this bit for a start:

Thus, although the Irish TV market contributes only €5 million pa to the central pot (c.€3m to the Six Nations pot and c.€2 million to the ERC pot), the other TV markets contribute much more, and the IRFU therefore receives €16 million each year from the central pot (c.€11m from Six Nations and c.€5m from ERC). This constitutes about 24% of the IRFU’s total annual turnover.

IRFU statement

That is hardly the fault of the IRFU, or specifically the Provinces. Get your own house in order, and stop looking to blame others for your failures. RRW jumping into bed with the PRL doesn't help your cause, as PRL would just a quick boot you out when it suits them. Just as LNR did with PRL.
What value have the regions added to the Rabo in all this? If anything they have devalued it as the likes of Peter Thomas, and their supporters, do all to tarnish the brand

You have a complete an utter unwillingness to look at the facts.

Believe me, the regions have their failings. They are trying to get their houses in order, but when you have such stale, toxic individuals supposedly doing what is best or the game, it's a mammoth, uphill task.

So break down the ' other TV markets contribute much more ' for me here in terms of what Italy, Scotland and Wales contribute, how that contribution props up the 6Ns and HEC, and how it translates to Irish success. Thanks in advance....

I look at the facts if they're presented. You haven't really presented any.
I know the regions have their failings. You don't need to convince me. Oh, so it's the fault of the Irish, and it's the fault of WRU. Anyone else you would like to blame?

Poor lad..

irish and welsh..

he deserves special treatment dude..

Alan partridge would have a lot to say about that.

But anyway check what he has to say about the irish in this one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3gfjpcgZmw

Don't think there is any Welsh in him. English chap of Irish extraction. Quite a lot of Irish family. He spends a fair bit of time over here.

Anyway, I'm obviously no expert on him, being too stupid to realise that he "coined the phrase" that led to someone's username.   

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Hi Chucky, just so you know - the Six Nations is sold into 170 countries worldwide, not just the Six Nations that play in the competition.

Should all those countries deserve a cut from the money because people watch the competition rather than those who play in it?

edit: similar situation with the Heineken Cup - they can watch that in places like New Zealand, Australia and South Africa and I have even watched the PRO 12 in Portugal.

Sin é wrote:

Chunky Norwich wrote:

Hi Chucky, just so you know - the Six Nations is sold into 170 countries worldwide, not just the Six Nations that play in the competition.

Should all those countries deserve a cut from the money because people watch the competition rather than those who play in it?

edit: similar situation with the Heineken Cup - they can watch that in places like New Zealand, Australia and South Africa and I have even watched the PRO 12 in Portugal.

The answer is clearly no.

Why did he even bring that up?

Sin' e

countries pay to watch the sports. They do not get paid to watch them..

But saying that maybe Salmond and co should start paying people to watch scotland.... Cant see anyone watching otherwise 

Scotland is coming in for some big hits this season - some big, low-down, below-the-belt hits. It has perfectly nothing to do with their Neighbours trying to put the boot in in the lead in to the Independence vote of course

Some might say that the old maxim "With friends like these.............." after the drubbing the Scots have taken lately.

mystiroakey wrote:Why did he even bring that up?

Sin' e

countries pay to watch the sports. They do not get paid to watch them..

But saying that maybe Salmond and co should start paying people to watch scotland.... Cant see anyone watching otherwise 

Only trying to figure out Chucky's (& PRL's) logic that because Irish people don't have as many tv sets as England, they shouldn't get as much money as the English teams. Not only that, but they leaching off the English.

Now, I want to know who deserves all the media money raised outside the countries that don't participate in the Heineken Cup.

And should Ireland be able to keep all the tax money it saves the ERC (about 5m) per annum as that is money taken from the pockets of Irish people.

Sine.

you mean what unions deserve the money.

as with most sports . The money should be split between. Competing teams..  Obviously a eng v ire makes more more money over a Italy v Scotland.

the kiwis only seem to play big value games , and its for that reason.

and off course bringing that to point same should go for teams on the ERC.

if those teams are union owned it goes to the unions. If the teams arnt it goes to the team or more precisely the teams owners/stakeholders

Sin é wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:Why did he even bring that up?

Sin' e

countries pay to watch the sports. They do not get paid to watch them..

But saying that maybe Salmond and co should start paying people to watch scotland.... Cant see anyone watching otherwise 

Only trying to figure out Chucky's (& PRL's) logic that because Irish people don't have as many tv sets as England, they shouldn't get as much money as the English teams. Not only that, but they leaching off the English.

Now, I want to know who deserves all the media money raised outside the countries that don't participate in the Heineken Cup.

And should Ireland be able to keep all the tax money it saves the ERC (about 5m) per annum as that is money taken from the pockets of Irish people.

Sin e, the PRL have said that the English clubs should get the SAME as the Provinces not more. The issue is they want the base amount a team gets be fixed regardless of which competition they're in. Since there are many more Enlgish clubs they would get more overall. But each team would get the same.

Sin e, the Irish aren't saving the tax money. The ERC/6 nations are and then the rest is divvied up...as you know.

HammerofThunor wrote:

Sin e, the PRL have said that the English clubs should get the SAME as the Provinces not more.  The issue is they want the base amount a team gets be fixed regardless of which competition they're in. Since there are many more Enlgish clubs they would get more overall. But each team would get the same.

Sin e, the Irish aren't saving the tax money. The ERC/6 nations are and then the rest is divvied up...as you know.

They also get more respresentation each year by right...feeding into International dynamics as one Johnny Wilkinson admits to - England International needs a HEC event is a good estimate of his opinion last week.

They get six shots at the current HEC event.  That's bonus points enough, considering the current HEC event was created by Unions for Union development (International standards rising)

As for the tax money.  Yes, the ERC is saving the tax money but the Irish still need services thus they get to pay the shortfall in having the ERC on their doorstep.  The same with all the other businesses that Europe and the rest of the world are so mad at us about.  Businesses pay less in corporate tax...Irish workers take up the strain.

HammerofThunor wrote:

Sin é wrote:

mystiroakey wrote:Why did he even bring that up?

Sin' e

countries pay to watch the sports. They do not get paid to watch them..

But saying that maybe Salmond and co should start paying people to watch scotland.... Cant see anyone watching otherwise 

Only trying to figure out Chucky's (& PRL's) logic that because Irish people don't have as many tv sets as England, they shouldn't get as much money as the English teams. Not only that, but they leaching off the English.

Now, I want to know who deserves all the media money raised outside the countries that don't participate in the Heineken Cup.

And should Ireland be able to keep all the tax money it saves the ERC (about 5m) per annum as that is money taken from the pockets of Irish people.

Sin e, the PRL have said that the English clubs should get the SAME as the Provinces not more.  The issue is they want the base amount a team gets be fixed regardless of which competition they're in. Since there are many more Enlgish clubs they would get more overall. But each team would get the same.

Sin e, the Irish aren't saving the tax money. The ERC/6 nations are and then the rest is divvied up...as you know.

The tax savings means that savings is then able to go into the pot, just as broadcasting revenue goes into the pot.

http://www.espn.co.uk/scrum/rugby/story/214883.html

Curious to know what the 'considerable' tax advantages that are being offered by the new proposed venue for the euro organisation in Geneva - if the espn article is to be believed.

Corporate tax rates and the arbitrage played out to generate employment and income tax is not a thread for a Rugby site.

Recwatcher wrote:http://www.espn.co.uk/scrum/rugby/story/214883.html

Curious to know what the 'considerable' tax advantages that are being offered by the new proposed venue for the euro organisation in Geneva - if the espn article is to be believed.

Corporate tax rates and the arbitrage played out to generate employment and income tax is not a thread for a Rugby site.

Not when it doesn't suit the arguments of some.

Recwatcher wrote:

Corporate tax rates and the arbitrage played out to generate employment and income tax is not a thread for a Rugby site.

It's certainly been prime territory for such topics in this particular thread!! and the HEC topic in general. Let's not get coy now when the endgame looks so close at hand.

The one thing I've never had a problem agreeing with the English posters here on is that money should be paid per team not union. I also think it's better for everyone if teams in both competitions get the same amount.

My fear is that the next step for the English and French once they have more control is to try and link what money a team "deserves" to how many people there are with televisions in the country that team happens to be in. That would be ridiculous.

Feckless Rogue wrote:The one thing I've never had a problem agreeing with the English posters here on is that money should be paid per team not union. I also think it's better for everyone if teams in both competitions get the same amount.

My fear is that the next step for the English and French once they have more control is to try and link what money a team "deserves" to how many people there are with televisions in the country that team happens to be in. That would be ridiculous.

Where does this fear come from though? have either the French or English ever tried to link viewers with the amount of money a team gets. Glad to see people are finally agreeing that this is a club/province/region competition. Each entity as far as the competition goes are separate and should be treated as so from the competition point of view.

Nathan it's human nature to exploit a powerful position. The Franglo's claim ownership to all those eyeball's glued to TV's. They may decide they deserve more at some future point. If they're in control then what's to stop them other than their own benign good will?

A cynical Irishman might say that, because of our history we're wiser to the potential of being screwed by bigger more powerful neighbours.

But a cynical Englishman might say that the Irish, because of our history, are more sensitive to seeing the potential for being screwed even when it isn't there.

Feckless Rogue wrote:The one thing I've never had a problem agreeing with the English posters here on is that money should be paid per team not union. I also think it's better for everyone if teams in both competitions get the same amount.

My fear is that the next step for the English and French once they have more control is to try and link what money a team "deserves" to how many people there are with televisions in the country that team happens to be in. That would be ridiculous.

That's easily sorted. Just have it so it needs 100% approval to change financial distribution. Done.

HammerofThunor wrote:

Feckless Rogue wrote:The one thing I've never had a problem agreeing with the English posters here on is that money should be paid per team not union. I also think it's better for everyone if teams in both competitions get the same amount.

My fear is that the next step for the English and French once they have more control is to try and link what money a team "deserves" to how many people there are with televisions in the country that team happens to be in. That would be ridiculous.

That's easily sorted. Just have it so it needs 100% approval to change financial distribution. Done.

Nothing done there though Hammer as none of us know how long any contract for any new competition will be (I personally hope a short one because I feel there are more chess moves down the line from 'Big' players and I'd prefer doing my negotiating from outside a tent rather than being stuck in one with all that body odour and bad breath )  

As we've seen, people can just decide to walk away when and if the conditions don't suit their projections for future growth.

Feckless is right - the pressure is still there to regard European rugby as strictly and rigidly a business, and that certain players/partners should sacrifice themselves for the greater good of that business model because market forces must always have their way.  
That pressure hasn't gone away.  It might lie quietly for a while now with a 'solution' in sight; but greed ensures it will raise its head again as world club rugby prospects increase into the next decade or so.

Well, yes. But the control itself is not an issue. They couldn't force the issue, regardless of the voting structure of the ERC (or replacement). Every time the structure comes up for renewal it will be (and should be) reviewed. If any parties aren't happy they try and renogotiate, if they're still not happy they leave. There's no way round that.

It's definitely not over. This is a sane compromise but when this agreement runs out I have no doubt the French and English will be pushing for a bigger slice of the pie at our expense. Thats what history tells us will happen- but in the meantime we should just enjoy the rugby while our unions quietly prepare the battle ground for when this deal runs out.

Notch wrote:It's definitely not over. This is a sane compromise but when this agreement runs out I have no doubt the French and English will be pushing for a bigger slice of the pie at our expense. Thats what history tells us will happen- but in the meantime we should just enjoy the rugby while our unions quietly prepare the battle ground for when this deal runs out.

....and Irish rugby must fight through this new agreement to prove once again that it's not power and influence that will dictate what happens on the field in terms of winning. Our challenge is now to keep up the quality, to sustain the fight and to continue to be there or thereabouts at the business end of the new premium European contest.

What needs to happen over the next contract is for any dependence on the English and French to be removed. So if the English and/or French try to make further changes that are unacceptable, the others can pull out.

Feckless Rogue wrote:Nathan it's human nature to exploit a powerful position. The Franglo's claim ownership to all those eyeball's glued to TV's. They may decide they deserve more at some future point. If they're in control then what's to stop them other than their own benign good will?

A cynical Irishman might say that, because of our history we're wiser to the potential of being screwed by bigger more powerful neighbours.

But a cynical Englishman might say that the Irish, because of our history, are more sensitive to seeing the potential for being screwed even when it isn't there.

You make good points.

I do feel you 'celts' as passionate as you are do play that 'victim' card way to often these days. When it really isnt needed

We arn't here to screw you over any more. But then when sport turns into business it is war(business)- and the bigger and the richer do win.


Both sides need to focus on both things. What is important but what is fair.. 

I cannot see the english being underhand within sport when it comes to the home nations in rugby.. But France are the snake in the grass you should never trust..

The 'victim card'?     

That was very much THE PRL stunt throughout the 'talks' and even moreso during the 'non-talks'.  They must have learned from the 'Celts'.  They played it so well too.

First it was them against the woyld in the form of the menace that is the ERC.
Then it was them and their friends the French against the Pro12 (most especially their lovely friends and comrades, the Irish, which they have a special love for with all the cotton wool and kisses and stuff).
Then it was them on their own again, having a perfect plan ruined coz nobody wanted to play their game their way, under their conditions, their rules, their control, their command.
Then it was them trying to unearth new friends against the big bad French (their new enemies) - and where did they go look for those friends? - the Pro12 members that they had intially been laughing at.
.... and then, finally, they tried to isolate the Welsh regions from their own Pro12 comrades, intent on ending the viability of the Pro12 if they couldn't get their initial preference, the Franglo Cup.

The PRL - never could find a true friend in the mess of intrigue and double-sealing their bosses were engaged in to get everything they wanted without compromise.

You cannot "see the English being underhand within sport"?  You're like a star in a Galaxy, mytir.  You can't see the shape of your galaxy because you're in it.

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sport/rugby/euro-standoff-is-all-but-resolved-says-ulster-chief-30018617.html

Shane Logan is not a man to go public unless he is very sure of his facts.
Knowing how the man operates that is good enough for me to be convinced there will be a European Cup next year.

Depending on whether Georgia and Russia are in Europe (they're both part of the FIRA-AER so in rugby terms they are) he's wrong about the number of professional clubs in Europe.

In fact he's also ignoring the 2nd tier in England and France (there are at least 24 professional teams in England, not sure about Doncaster).

But hey, semantics.

Also it's interesting that he's talking about the 'public announcements' from the clubs that haven't come to pass but ignores the public announcement from the 5 unions that they were going to play in a competition next year made up of the 12 Pro12 teams, a few French teams, and a couple of others. Or is that one coming to pass.

Other than that it's just "we're nearly there" again isn't it?

OK SF.
 
What is the shape of my galaxy. is it a massive [censored] over other galaxy's/nations or is it a tea pot that offers good quality breakfast tea and a welcoming atmosphere

According to The Examiner (and they usually get it right), there will be a Heineken Cup & Amlin next year organised by the Six Nations Company from Dublin. There will be a new club competition then for the FIRA countries organised out of Switzerland.

The Six Nations committee looks set to govern the Rugby Champions Cup next season, to replace the Heineken Cup run by European Rugby Cup (ERC). Six Nations bosses would also administrate a second-tier contest to replace the Amlin Challenge Cup.

But under plans being discussed, FIRA-AER, the amateur European rugby association, would govern a new third-tier tournament aimed at developing the game across the continent.

National teams like Portugal, Spain and Holland could compete alongside club sides from Italy and other European league systems, if the latest radical proposal is backed.

The French clubs wanted FIRA to control all European knock-out rugby next season, replacing ERC entirely, with the English teams favouring the Six Nations committee.

But the newly-suggested solution indicates a compromise that could prove one of the vital steps towards saving Europe-wide cup rugby.

Should a third-level competition get the go-ahead, FIRA-AER would govern proceedings from a base in Geneva.

It is understood administration of the frontline competition could yet remain in Dublin, where ERC’s headquarters are situated.

A Heineken Cup alternative run by the Six Nations would only add to John Feehan’s power across the continent.

The Six Nations chief executive is also CEO of the British and Irish Lions and the RaboDirect Pro12.

The television rights battle between BT Sport and Sky still defines the European impasse, with the RFU thought to be attempting to broker a compromise between the two rival broadcasters.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/rugby/third-tier-compromise-on-cards-in-euro-crisis-259100.html

I'd imagine John Feehan of Six Nations Co. could knock a few of the media heads together to sort out their differences as they will all be looking to get a slice of some or all of Six Nations, Lions, Pro12, Heineken Cup.

No wonder there are 6 bidders for sponsorship of the Pro12 at the moment. I bet BT regret declining to tender for the Pro12 now!

"No wonder there are 6 bidders for sponsorship of the Pro12 at the moment. I bet BT regret declining to tender for the Pro12 now!"

I don't understand the logic there. Or are you suggesting that John Feehan would use his position in the 6 Nations Co. to influence for the benefit for the Pro12 competition?

So all these cries of concern about the English clubs gaining control were just a smokescreen to cover up the Irish power grab?

Surely the new competition being run by 6Ns is what PRL were asking for? I would doubt Feehan would abuse his position, or be allowed to abuse his position, for any power grab.
In light of recent developments for AP, and T14, the Rabo could do with strong sponsorship. If true, hopefully a lucrative deal can be done with one of those six.

Rather bleak picture from GT

http://www.irishtimes.com/sport/rugby/machinations-behind-new-european-tournament-are-a-preview-of-things-to-come-1.1695155?page=1

It is bleak. We still haven't come up with a way to restrict English/French power and it's inevitable they will try and take more control. The club game and the international game are not two separate entities, they are two parts of an ecosystem that influence each other.

I've long believed that our season needs to be dramatically restructured so that the Six Nations is moved forwards so that we have a block of games at the end of the season in much better weather that includes the Six Nations and is succeeded by the summer tour and that should be the priority for the Unions, but the problem is now that consent among the Unions might not be enough to get important things done.

I still believe we need to compartmentalise the season in the NH so our top club competitions and test rugby do not overlap, but no-one is going to be willing to cut the game time of the domestic tournaments to achieve that. The prospect that we could one day see the meaningful reform of NH rugby needed to compete with the SH seems more far away than ever.

We all love each other really.... and there will be no more back-stabbing from anybody...for a while... at least not in daylight.

Love, hugs, and mutual respect is what the future is.... for it is so written in the IRB lawbook    Quiet down Thornley, you troublemaker you! Why ain't Zebo being picked, btw????? Tell us, Thornley!

Although that Thornley article said the ERC Sky deal was worth 85M euros a year   Isn't the entire pot currently 45M? So add in the French and Italian coverage, sponsorship, etc. You're talking about a >100% increase in money.

That's got to be cowpat right?

He does say at one point the ERC/Sky deal is for 3 years and then elsewhere that it's for 4 years (it was 4).

HammerofThunor wrote:"No wonder there are 6 bidders for sponsorship of the Pro12 at the moment. I bet BT regret declining to tender for the Pro12 now!"

I don't understand the logic there. Or are you suggesting that John Feehan would use his position in the 6 Nations Co. to influence for the benefit for the Pro12 competition?

So all these cries of concern about the English clubs gaining control were just a smokescreen to cover up the Irish power grab?

He wouldn't have to abuse it. Declining to even tender for the PRO12 would make anyone suspicious of BT and their modus operandi and whether you would trust them enough to work with them.

I'm no fan of Murdock's Sky, but pretty much everyone who has worked with them like Feehan for the Lions & McGrath for ERC say they are just great to work with. BT maybe still a bit raw in the broadcasting game so far to have learned how to treat potential clients.

Notch wrote:It is bleak. We still haven't come up with a way to restrict English/French power and it's inevitable they will try and take more control. The club game and the international game are not two separate entities, they are two parts of an ecosystem that influence each other.

I've long believed that our season needs to be dramatically restructured so that the Six Nations is moved forwards so that we have a block of games at the end of the season in much better weather that includes the Six Nations and is succeeded by the summer tour and that should be the priority for the Unions, but the problem is now that consent among the Unions might not be enough to get important things done.

I still believe we need to compartmentalise the season in the NH so our top club competitions and test rugby do not overlap, but no-one is going to be willing to cut the game time of the domestic tournaments to achieve that. The prospect that we could one day see the meaningful reform of NH rugby needed to compete with the SH seems more far away than ever.

I posted an article/report of a talk given by John Feehan last week. One thing he said was that the Six Nations will never be moved from its present time slot because this time of year there are no other competitions to compete with. April May there are all those cup finals, champions league etc to compete with.

Thats a fair enough reason, but the quality of our rugby suffers for it.

Well I certainly don't buy that reasoning if he mentioned the champions league..

firstly premier league games are watched more
champions league are always in the week anyway and are on at the moment(during this month) So never could affect the rugby weekend fixtures.

big premier league clashes like arsenal v totenham or Everton v Liverpool let alone a Chelsea v citeh or united game etc are always on almost every weekend during these months effecting the early or later 6 nations kick offs.

but in all fairness . I love 6 nations at the start of the year.

Here is the article again:

ohn opened his talk by explaining the background to the 4/5/6 Nations and the Lions, such as the Lions name which comes from the badge that was worn on the blazers of the 1924 party. After this he explained, in a very forthright manner, how he perceives his job. As CEO, Mr Feehan approaches his job as a Sports Rights Holder, and it is his task to maximise the 6N/Lions revenues while maintaining the status of both events.

I would be very much in favour of a restructuring of the 6N and have been puzzled as to why it has still to happen. Mr Feehan was very frank about this, however. As the Sports Rights Holder, he has a responsibility to RBS Six Nations Limited (and the Lions) to maximise the revenue streams.

The 6 Nations has a lot going for it, for tv companies and sponsors :

• Biggest Stadia.
• Top Margins on ticket prices due to demand constantly outstripping supply.
• No Trouble, unlike soccer.
• Friendly Fans who love the 6 Nations, year after year.
• Fans who forge inter country relationships.
• A lot of the fans would be from the ABC1 grouping, a marketer’s dream.
• The 6 Nations has now overtaken the NFL as the highest averaged attendances event, in world sport, with an average of 70,000 in 2007.

The Lions is similar to the 6 Nations as mentioned above but also revels in the increase in numbers who travel away every four years. Truly they are a phenomenon :

• 1997 - 10,000 travelled to South Africa
• 2001 - 20,000 travelled to Australia
• 2005 - 29,000 travelled to New Zealand
• 2009 - 50,000 are expected to travel to South Africa


The reason why the 6 Nations has remained in February and March, is due to the fact that it is the Key Sporting event in that time period, and Television companies will pay a premium for the 6 Nations to remain in this slot. Feehan is unapologetic about this. To move the event to April/May, and an already crowded calendar, Rugby would be a small fish in a big pond. It is top heavy with Soccer semi finals and finals, Grand National, Cricket etc, even the Boat Race !

Scheduling has driven the growth in audience, and what sponsors are willing to pay. Five years ago, 30m people watched the 6 Nations on television. Last year, that was up to 132m viewers. Get your Product and Distribution strategy right and the revenues will follow the market. And boy have they !

Though the TV companies do dictate the scheduling, it is done within parameters laid down by the RBS Six Nations Limited. For example :

• As little matches on Sunday as possible, and no more than one. Feehan is aware of how unpopular this is with fans and makes sure that is taken into consideration.
• Broadcasters do not like all Saturday games except for the final weekend. However, John has managed to get a second one in this year.
• Fair allocation of when the games take place, though Croke Park is unavailable on Sundays, so it not possible for Ireland to have a home game on a Sunday.
• Certain fixtures may not fill at odd times. e.g. Scotland v Italy on a Sunday afternoon.
• The BBC require at least 2 England games at 5.30pm or later.
• In France, by law, nothing can interfere with the showing of the 8pm news, therefore any game involving them has to finish before 8pm or start when the 8pm news is over.
• Mr Feehan wouldn’t confirm it (except a “you never know” type answer), but do expect a Friday night 6 Nations game in the next year or two.

The prospect of Argentina coming into a 7 Nations is highly unlikely now that the IRB have come down on their inclusion within an expanded Tri Nations. John made the valid point that when France joined the 5 Nations in 1910, Italy didn’t come in until 2000, 90 years later, and have a fair bit to go before they “bed in” properly. France didn’t win their first 5 Nations until after the Second World War. Logically, he said, Argentina going into a new 4 Nations is the way to go. When the TV contract is renegotiated in 2010, it will provide the money for probably 2 new Super 14/16 teams based in Argentina. This will allow the top Argentinian players to return from Europe. However, this is all complicated by the UAR being a basket case (my words), at the moment. Political in-fighting and the ongoing amateur v professional fight makes it difficult to progress this.

The phenomenon that is the British & Irish Lions, is going from strength to strength. Aside from the increase in travelling support, as I mentioned earlier, it is estimated that there will be a 100% increase in viewing figures for South Africa, as they are just 2 hours ahead. 23% will watch later in the day. The B&I website has gone from 50,000 in 2002, to 3 million hits in 2008. You may not be aware but the Home country will keep the gate money, so the Lions must generate income from Sponsorship and Licencing only. To put it in context, The Lions sold 23,000 shirts/socks etc in 1997, 144,000 in 2001 but 800,000 in 2005. Compare this with the 88,000 Munster sold in 2006/7. It is on a mammoth scale.

It will be interesting to see how the club game matches up over the next few years. Yes, the 6 Nations and the Lions are streets ahead but so too was International Soccer before the tail of the clubs started to wag the dog. As CEO, John Feehan has done extremely well in revitalising the 6 Nations and the Lions. He has maximised revenues for the game of rugby while retaining the aura of two fine events. Pitted against, primarily, the English and French clubs, he is currently in the driving seat but it will be interesting to see where we are in say, 10 years time.

HammerofThunor wrote:Depending on whether Georgia and Russia are in Europe (they're both part of the FIRA-AER so in rugby terms they are) he's wrong about the number of professional clubs in Europe.

In fact he's also ignoring the 2nd tier in England and France (there are at least 24 professional teams in England, not sure about Doncaster).

But hey, semantics.

Also it's interesting that he's talking about the 'public announcements' from the clubs that haven't come to pass but ignores the public announcement from the 5 unions that they were going to play in a competition next year made up of the 12 Pro12 teams, a few French teams, and a couple of others. Or is that one coming to pass.

Other than that it's just "we're nearly there" again isn't it?

Quite a few of the teams in the championship are Semi-Professional, certainly not full time!

HammerofThunor wrote:Although that Thornley article said the ERC Sky deal was worth 85M euros a year   Isn't the entire pot currently 45M? So add in the French and Italian coverage, sponsorship, etc. You're talking about a >100% increase in money.

That's got to be cowpat right?

He does say at one point the ERC/Sky deal is for 3 years and then elsewhere that it's for 4 years (it was 4).

Yep, i'd imagine the 85M euro figure is for the whole length of the deal.

And yes your right about the entire pot. ERC's TOTAL revenue for 13/14 will be 52M euros.

Sin é wrote:Here is the article again:

ohn opened his talk by explaining the background to the 4/5/6 Nations and the Lions, such as the Lions name which comes from the badge that was worn on the blazers of the 1924 party. After this he explained, in a very forthright manner, how he perceives his job. As CEO, Mr Feehan approaches his job as a Sports Rights Holder, and it is his task to maximise the 6N/Lions revenues while maintaining the status of both events.

I would be very much in favour of a restructuring of the 6N and have been puzzled as to why it has still to happen. Mr Feehan was very frank about this, however. As the Sports Rights Holder, he has a responsibility to RBS Six Nations Limited (and the Lions) to maximise the revenue streams.

The 6 Nations has a lot going for it, for tv companies and sponsors :

• Biggest Stadia.
• Top Margins on ticket prices due to demand constantly outstripping supply.
• No Trouble, unlike soccer.
• Friendly Fans who love the 6 Nations, year after year.
• Fans who forge inter country relationships.
• A lot of the fans would be from the ABC1 grouping, a marketer’s dream.
• The 6 Nations has now overtaken the NFL as the highest averaged attendances event, in world sport, with an average of 70,000 in 2007.

The Lions is similar to the 6 Nations as mentioned above but also revels in the increase in numbers who travel away every four years. Truly they are a phenomenon :

• 1997 - 10,000 travelled to South Africa
• 2001 - 20,000 travelled to Australia
• 2005 - 29,000 travelled to New Zealand
• 2009 - 50,000 are expected to travel to South Africa


The reason why the 6 Nations has remained in February and March, is due to the fact that it is the Key Sporting event in that time period, and Television companies will pay a premium for the 6 Nations to remain in this slot. Feehan is unapologetic about this. To move the event to April/May, and an already crowded calendar, Rugby would be a small fish in a big pond. It is top heavy with Soccer semi finals and finals, Grand National, Cricket etc, even the Boat Race !

Scheduling has driven the growth in audience, and what sponsors are willing to pay. Five years ago, 30m people watched the 6 Nations on television. Last year, that was up to 132m viewers. Get your Product and Distribution strategy right and the revenues will follow the market. And boy have they !

Though the TV companies do dictate the scheduling, it is done within parameters laid down by the RBS Six Nations Limited. For example :

• As little matches on Sunday as possible, and no more than one. Feehan is aware of how unpopular this is with fans and makes sure that is taken into consideration.
• Broadcasters do not like all Saturday games except for the final weekend. However, John has managed to get a second one in this year.
• Fair allocation of when the games take place, though Croke Park is unavailable on Sundays, so it not possible for Ireland to have a home game on a Sunday.
• Certain fixtures may not fill at odd times. e.g. Scotland v Italy on a Sunday afternoon.
• The BBC require at least 2 England games at 5.30pm or later.
• In France, by law, nothing can interfere with the showing of the 8pm news, therefore any game involving them has to finish before 8pm or start when the 8pm news is over.
• Mr Feehan wouldn’t confirm it (except a “you never know” type answer), but do expect a Friday night 6 Nations game in the next year or two.

The prospect of Argentina coming into a 7 Nations is highly unlikely now that the IRB have come down on their inclusion within an expanded Tri Nations. John made the valid point that when France joined the 5 Nations in 1910, Italy didn’t come in until 2000, 90 years later, and have a fair bit to go before they “bed in” properly. France didn’t win their first 5 Nations until after the Second World War. Logically, he said, Argentina going into a new 4 Nations is the way to go. When the TV contract is renegotiated in 2010, it will provide the money for probably 2 new Super 14/16 teams based in Argentina. This will allow the top Argentinian players to return from Europe. However, this is all complicated by the UAR being a basket case (my words), at the moment. Political in-fighting and the ongoing amateur v professional fight makes it difficult to progress this.

The phenomenon that is the British & Irish Lions, is going from strength to strength. Aside from the increase in travelling support, as I mentioned earlier, it is estimated that there will be a 100% increase in viewing figures for South Africa, as they are just 2 hours ahead. 23% will watch later in the day. The B&I website has gone from 50,000 in 2002, to 3 million hits in 2008. You may not be aware but the Home country will keep the gate money, so the Lions must generate income from Sponsorship and Licencing only. To put it in context, The Lions sold 23,000 shirts/socks etc in 1997, 144,000 in 2001 but 800,000 in 2005. Compare this with the 88,000 Munster sold in 2006/7. It is on a mammoth scale.

It will be interesting to see how the club game matches up over the next few years. Yes, the 6 Nations and the Lions are streets ahead but so too was International Soccer before the tail of the clubs started to wag the dog. As CEO, John Feehan has done extremely well in revitalising the 6 Nations and the Lions. He has maximised revenues for the game of rugby while retaining the aura of two fine events. Pitted against, primarily, the English and French clubs, he is currently in the driving seat but it will be interesting to see where we are in say, 10 years time.

Sine, it's obvious from your previous posts that you don't know much about the culture of football.

International football HAS NEVER BEEN bigger than club football. Yes the World cup and Euro's are massive events but they take place every two years.

Week in, week out, millions of fans watch club football live all over Europe. They always have and they always will and their clubs are their first priority. International football is the icing on the cake and it's decline (i'll agree there has been one) has as much to do with the cretins running FIFA as it does with the clubs. Even taking that into consideration the World cup is still the biggest show on the planet along with the Olympics are makes FIFA huge amounts of money. Over a billion dollars in 2012 alone.

To suggest that Rugby which has always been driven by the International game will turn into Football which is driven by the club game (Man Utd turnover far more then the RFU) is wrong. I would expect Club rugby to grow but it will never threaten the place of International rugby as the pinnacle of the game.

Andy, I'm not making the claims about which is bigger, its the person who wrote the report of the workshop that Feehan gave.

However, in France it is evident that the Club game is overshadowing the international game because there is so much more money in the club game. Toulouse are playing their French international players in club games even though they agreed to rest them in their most recent League agreement with the FFR.

What will happen in France (and maybe England) is that like soccer in England, it will be full of non-English internationals playing in its league and that will have a detrimental effect on the national team.

Sin é wrote:Andy, I'm not making the claims about which is bigger, its the person who wrote the report of the workshop that Feehan gave.

However, in France it is evident that the Club game is overshadowing the international game because there is so much more money in the club game. Toulouse are playing their French international players in club games even though they agreed to rest them in their most recent League agreement with the FFR.

What will happen in France (and maybe England) is that like soccer in England, it will be full of non-English internationals playing in its league and that will have a detrimental effect on the national team.

The England national team were failing for decades before the increase of foreigners into the premier league. Its an old excuse!!! As i said stick to rugby.

andyi wrote: To suggest that Rugby which has always been driven by the International game will turn into Football which is driven by the club game (Man Utd turnover far more then the RFU) is wrong. I would expect Club rugby to grow but it will never threaten the place of International rugby as the pinnacle of the game.

It is already compromising International rugby in France and the way the English owners are behaving it is only a matter of time it starts happening their.
Currently the RFU are holding the line - but only just

andyi wrote:

Sin é wrote:Andy, I'm not making the claims about which is bigger, its the person who wrote the report of the workshop that Feehan gave.

However, in France it is evident that the Club game is overshadowing the international game because there is so much more money in the club game. Toulouse are playing their French international players in club games even though they agreed to rest them in their most recent League agreement with the FFR.

What will happen in France (and maybe England) is that like soccer in England, it will be full of non-English internationals playing in its league and that will have a detrimental effect on the national team.

The England national team were failing for decades before the increase of foreigners into the premier league. Its an old excuse!!! As i said stick to rugby.

and now thanks to some foreign imports I think we are starting to see a real depth of talent coming through.

It is actually looking up for England footy..

Imagine if we still played the big lad hoof ball we used to without foreigners coming over showing us the way.

There is literally no correlation with England being worse- In fact I think we will be better off in the long run due to have other top players in our league.

We also have such a high level second division in the championship were teams are on par with teams that are bottom half of even the other best leagues in Europe!!

mystiroakey wrote:
and now thanks to some foreign imports I think we are starting to see a real depth of talent coming through.

It is actually looking up for England footy..

Imagine if we still played the big lad hoof ball we used to without foreigners coming over showing us the way.

There is literally no correlation with England being worse- In fact I think we will be better off in the long run due to have other top players in our league.

We also have such a high level second division in the championship were teams are on par with teams that are bottom half of even the other best leagues in Europe!!

An argument if there ever was one for what the PRL (and the LNR) want as a blueprint for the future.  Less salary caps - no salary caps - big money foreign investors coming in - more top-flight foreign players adding spice and 'world interest' to their individual leagues - vastly improved marketing potential world wide for AP/Top14 sides.

Yes - a grand plan for those two leagues.  PLUS - absolutely admitting the causal link between big money, power, influence, exotic players, top-level club European competition and the success of England International teams.  The two are tied.  AP assists England International.  Top14 assists French International. That's generally been denied for months. It's true no matter how often it gets denied.

There you go.  That's why the rest of us should and still are oh so cautious about the cheek kissing and friendly bear-hugs from our 'partners' in Europe.